[AusNOG] conroy reaffirms commitment to filter

[Andrew Oskam]

>
>
> Whilst I dislike that these sort of tactics are those most effective, we
> have to remember that the filter is not a technical issue, but a
> political issue, and must be treated like one.
>
I disagree, I believe it to be both technical and political

> Simple, emotional arguments work best.
I agree, I think that, we should be bringing the issues where this 
filter will interfere or more-so where it's not doing enough.

Instead of focusing on hiding (yes, hiding) the refused content - The 
focus should be on chat rooms and social networks where children are at 
danger. The online communities themselves are harmless, but the 
dangerous people within these communities are the ones we should be 
finding and locking away. Australian Families want tools to protect 
their children - What does "hiding" RC Content do to help? Nothing. 
Which of our needs, Australian Families needs, does the filter fulfill? 
None of them.

In my view, the govt is doing what they do best and twisting the truth 
to their own gain to place them on pedestal as if they are some godsend 
to Australian Families.

Isn't that their target audience? Australian mothers, fathers, and children?


Andrew Oskam

E  percy at th3interw3bs.net


NOTICE:

These comments are my own personal opinions only and do not necessarily 
reflect the positions or opinions of my employer or their affiliates. 
All comments are based upon my current knowledge and my own personal 
experiences. You should conduct independent tests to verify the validity 
of any statements made in this email before basing any decisions upon 
those statements.




On 1/07/10 12:15 PM, Ben Stewart wrote:
> Dan,
>
> On 1/07/10 11:14 AM, Daniel Hood wrote:
>    
>> If you want to stop this filter from coming through, we need mass
>> awareness that this filter isn’t going to work.
>>      
> Agreed. There needs to be a fair bit of noise made about this topic
> where the public can hear it, rather than just in the technical
> publications of the industry.
>
>    
>> This can easily be achieved by creating a bunch of videos / written /
>> audio tutorials with something like “The 5 easy steps to beating the
>> filter”. Just show people how to install TOR for firefox or such. If we
>> can show that the filter is going to be ineffective to the general
>> public then he’ll lose all footing.
>>      
> On this point though, I respectfully disagree. Joe and Jane Citizen
> aren't going to care about there being means to evade the internet
> filter any more than they care about ways to get around the meatspace
> classification system by purchasing items from Canberra.
>
> Additionally, the public by and large are not going to be concerned that
> rights are being infringed by the implementation of this filter - any
> campaign to oppose the the filter will need to make the issue a
> _personal_ one with each and every voter. Show that a topic relevant to
> a large number of voters is going to be blocked by the filter. Show that
> the government is questioning every voter's judgment by implementing
> this filter.
>
> I feel that the only means by which any headway can be made on the
> anti-filtering front is to start playing the same games as Conroy et
> al., and attach emotion to the argument - the government uses the child
> porn angle; what angle do we as a profession and industry use? It is
> difficult to use a double negative in this context - saying that a
> filter will not prevent {terrorism, child porn, bullying} is going to be
> ignored by the general public as 'too detailed, blah blah blah'. Simple,
> emotional arguments work best.
>
> Whilst I dislike that these sort of tactics are those most effective, we
> have to remember that the filter is not a technical issue, but a
> political issue, and must be treated like one.
>
> We have not yet really had any simple, persuasive statements about the
> filter that show in a non-technical manner why it is bad. This I think
> is where some energy needs to be spent before getting the word out there.
>
> Just my $0.02 + GST.
>
> - Ben
>
>    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20100701/8f0fb13b/attachment.html>